Miri AF - contrary to popular belief the AF does stand for 'as ****' but for A Finch - runs one of the hardest-hitting, most red-pilled accounts on Substack https://substack.com/@miriaf. In fact, if there were a female, ballsier and a bit-younger James Delingpole she'd probably write just like Miri. The daughter of university academics, Miri first went down the rabbit hole when her American university tried coercing into taking a measles vaccine. She has never looked back...
Her website is http://www.Miriaf.co.uk
↓ ↓ ↓
Earn interest on Gold:https://monetary-metals.com/delingpole/
/ / / / / /
The Delingpod LIVE IN DORSET | James Delingpole x Clive de Carle
For the first time in Delingpod history, James will be bringing his podcast live to Dorset to chat with Clive de Carle. Purchase tickets here:
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/the-delingpod-live-in-dorset-james-delingpole-x-clive-de-carle-tickets-670815646657?aff=ebdshpsearchautocomplete
/ / / / / /
Buy James a Coffee at: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/jamesdelingpoleSupport James’ Writing at: https://delingpole.substack.comSupport James monthly at: https://locals.com/member/JamesDelingpole?community_id=7720
I know I always say I'm excited about this week's special guest but I really am.
I love Denning Paul.
Listen, mother, come subscribe with me.
I love Denning Paul.
I love Denning Paul.
Welcome to the Denning Paul with me, James Denning Paul.
I know I always say I'm excited about this week's special guest, but I really am.
I'm really happy to be remaking the acquaintance of somebody I met online ages ago, someone ago that I've actually forgotten the circumstances.
And you may have come across her.
I think she does just about the best sub stack there is on sub stack.
And every time I read it, I think, gosh, that's like reading, reading me, which is a compliment, I guess.
Very much so.
So, I look at your, I look at your, um, substack and it's, it's Miriaf, uh, Miriaf.
And I always think of it mentally as Miri as F word, because it's like so hardcore.
Um, but it's not that, is it?
It's Miri Anne French.
Finch.
Sorry.
The double entendre is intentional.
When I first launched my website, I thought, what can I call it?
I want something that's a bit catchy, not just my name.
And then I realised what my initials are and I thought, oh, that's quite catchy.
You are, I mean, you are very hardcore.
So I think it is, it is appropriate.
I mean, almost scary.
I know, I know you've, I know you've frightened some of, some of my, some of the other people I've had on my, my, my, my pod with your uncompromising take on who is and who isn't, um, you know, controlled opposition or whatever.
Um, but before we go there, I wanted to, can you remind me how it was?
We, we, we, we first met online.
It was something to do with, with thinly disguised autobiography, wasn't it?
Well I have been a fan of yours for probably close to 20 years and I read that when it first came out and I thought it was wonderful and very funny.
And I grew up on a university campus so I knew how accurate what you were saying was and I just thought it was wonderfully observed.
Then I kind of lost track of what you were doing for quite a long time and then you emerged as a conspiracy theorist, as all the best people are of course.
Yeah.
Were you at the time?
I mean, surely you can't have been when you read Thin Disguised Autobiography, which came out, what, like 20 years ago, as you say?
I think I read it when I was about 17.
So it was in the early 2000s.
Yeah.
Do you know what?
Do I call you Miri, by the way?
Is that what people call you?
Yes.
I just use my full name when I want to sound a bit more serious and professional.
What you will find when you get to my advanced age is that the previous decades, they sort of blur and you're not very good on working out what you were doing at any particular time.
I mean, that book, which I'm still very proud of, belongs to a completely different stage of my life when I was part of, well, I never really was part of the establishment, was I?
I was always sort of flirting with membership, but they'd never have me in for reasons I now understand, but at the time I didn't.
And in a way, that was one of the questions I was asking in that Well, as the title suggests, Thinly Disguised Autobiography.
It was a Thinly Disguised Autobiography.
And one of the puzzles in that book is, look, I want to be with the in-crowd.
Why won't they have me as a member?
And now I know.
But thank you for getting the book.
Thank you for appreciating it.
Because I still think it's really good.
But I think a lot of people, particularly in the mainstream criticism, Didn't like it, for precisely the reasons now that they don't like me today.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Oh, I'm sure.
And I think they've completely turned their back on you, haven't they?
You've completely dropped out of having any mainstream exposure at all.
In a good way, actually.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
In that, as you know, I do this occasional, well, weekly podcast with Toby Young, and I've known Tobes A long time, since pretty much, I think, our second week at Oxford.
And we were both young men on the make in different ways.
We wanted to, like, we're like sort of Evelyn War characters.
We'd entered this magical realm and we wanted to get on.
I mean, it's a classic literary trope, isn't it?
I think of Eugène de Racignac in Balzac.
I don't know whether you've read There are characters like that in Russian literature as well, and I'm sure in English literature, young men who want to get on.
And where was I going with this?
Toby still hangs out with these people, with these establishment figures who he's carefully cultivated over the years, and I suppose he's become part of that milieu.
But the idea of even seeing these people across a room at a party appalls me.
And it's not because I understand that they are evil sellouts.
They're sort of, at best, useful idiots of the evil predator class that runs the world.
It's more that sort of This social awkwardness thing, this embarrassment, that you realise you've got nothing in common with these people, that you kind of, you part feel sorry for them and part despise them.
And what would the conversation I would have with them be?
It would be very uncomfortable, I think.
Very, absolutely.
Yeah.
I mean, their whole lives are based around illusions, aren't they?
Complex, expensive, well-maintained illusions.
You would be an enormous threat to those illusions that have served them very well.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I mean, I do feel a bit of an idiot for not twigging earlier what was going on.
When did you realise what was happening?
Well, I think the major event was when I went to university and they tried to force vaccinate me for a condition that wasn't very serious, you know, the measles, and I'd already had one vaccination for it.
And I did say to them, I've already had one vaccination and I've never had measles, so is it perhaps possible that that vaccination worked?
But they were very insistent to the extent that they said if I didn't have another measles vaccine, They would not only kick me out of the university but they would deport me from the country because I went to America to go to university.
Right.
And I thought this is a Insane overreaction!
You know, what is really going on here?
Why are they so desperate for me to have this injection?
So that's when I really, I think, tumbled down the rabbit hole and was looking into the measles vaccine, why this procedure was being so aggressively pushed on me, you know, what incentive they might have to push that on me.
And I think that kind of opened the floodgates and then I found myself ordering David Icke books, you know, questioning the moon landings.
The whole thing.
So can I just explore that moment in more detail?
So what was the university?
It was a branch of the State University of New York in a college village called Potsdam.
It's about an hour from the Canadian border.
And what were you going to read?
I was doing a major in professional writing with a minor in community health.
Right okay okay so I mean look at the time it must have been seen it must have seemed fantastic like America land of the free and gosh the chance to study study somewhere else really exciting and I imagine you thought you were going to get hot shot teaching and etc and I think
Lots of us, not you clearly, would have gone, well, they're being draconian because they're Americans and there are these elements, these draconian elements within the American system which jar with its reputation as this kind of land of the free.
But you decided to say, hang on a second, what did you find?
Where did your research take you?
Well, what happened was, for reasons I don't know, I'd already declined to have the meningitis vaccine when I was in the sick form.
It was that a nurse was going to come in and give it to us and didn't know anything about vaccines, but I just had the strong sense that there was something off with vaccines.
So I just didn't go into college that day.
And so I didn't get it.
So there was just this thought in the back of my mind, which wasn't based on anything other than instinct, that there's something wrong with vaccines.
I had all the normal childhood ones, but once I was an adult, I just felt not comfortable with them.
So I'd sent my vaccine records off to the university before I went, which they requested, and they said that was all fine.
But then when I arrived, I started getting these all-caps emails from the health understanding that it's a very serious health emergency, you have to come in and see us about.
I thought, it's a bit alarming.
And I went in and it was that they said, look, you've only had one measles vaccine, and as per our requirements, you have to have two.
So I did push back against this and saying, well, why?
It's not a very serious illness.
I've never had it.
I've been vaccinated.
I seem to be fine.
And they pushed and pushed.
And I didn't know enough about vaccines at that time to know how they're measured as being effective, is that they produce antibody titers in the blood.
And I said, instead of getting this vaccine, can I have the blood test to determine whether I've got the titers already so I wouldn't need another injection?
And you would think they would just say, oh, yeah, that's fine.
But they were so resistant to it.
And they tried multiple different things to get me to have a vaccine.
First, they said, well, you'll have to pay for that blood test yourself, whereas the vaccine will be free.
I was like, okay, that's fine.
I'll pay for it.
And then they said, and this was really set alarm bells ringing, you know, it would be easier just to have the vaccine.
And I was like, easier?
When is it easier to have an invasive, risky medical procedure that I probably don't need than a simple blood test?
So I put my foot down and said, no, I'm having the blood test.
And it did come back positive for the antibody titers.
So they very reluctantly agreed that I didn't have to have the vaccine and could continue on with my studies.
But, you know, the vast majority of people wouldn't have that kind of knowledge to have challenged it.
And they certainly didn't make it available.
And that it was so difficult for me to do that and continue studying and stay in the country.
I thought there's something more going on here.
And that's when I really started researching.
That's that's really interesting.
And that's that's testament to your strength of character.
Because I know that when I was that age, I was more of I was very cavalier about vaccines.
It was like, yeah, bring it on.
I've had yellow fever.
I've been to Africa.
Yeah, yeah.
Cholera.
Here's my scar.
And like, you know, it doesn't hurt a bit like the Queen said, you know, when she was when she was Railroaded, or maybe she did it willingly, into becoming the sort of, trying to make us all take the jab, that she said, oh, it didn't hurt, as though that was the main issue, that people were dying to have the thing, but they were worried it might hurt.
But I think a lot of us just sleepwalk into this stuff, don't we?
Yeah, definitely.
Because we've been given the propaganda about Edward Jenner.
And I keep going back to this about the milkmaids.
I mean, everyone knows the story, don't they?
Yes.
You must have learned it at school.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
Oh, that's where the word vaccine comes from, from the Latin vacca, which is cow from Edward Jenner.
Exactly, exactly.
And I know what I know now.
Have you noticed this?
That when they create these stories, they're quite good at creating these pictures that are going to help sell something to us.
So the idea of associating experimental medical procedures with dairy maids with fresh complexions, you think, what's not to like about that?
Yeah, of course, of course, absolutely.
And did you become involved in anti-jab or vaccine awareness campaigns after that?
Yeah, so what happened is after I came back to this country, I was kind of looking in earnest for people to connect with in the UK into all this kind of stuff, because it seemed that a lot of the anti-vaccine activism was all in America.
So I was doing a lot of research and I wasn't coming up with anyone much closer to home until I happened to randomly listen to a podcast one day and I heard a scientist called Professor Chris Exley being interviewed And he was studying aluminium.
He's the world's leading expert in aluminium, which is added to a lot of non-live vaccines to stimulate a stronger immune response.
And he was saying, look, I'm the world's leading expert in aluminium, and there is no safe amount of aluminium to inject into a human being.
And there are no clinically approved aluminium adjuvants.
There are clinically approved vaccines which use the adjuvants, but the adjuvants have never been studied independently and verified safe.
So there's no science at all to say this is safe.
And I thought, well, you know, he sounds really interesting.
It'd be great to talk to him, but he's probably based far away.
And then I found out, which was an extraordinary coincidence, that he was actually based at the University of Keele, which was the university campus I grew up on and my father and grandfather both lectured at for decades.
I thought, wow, that's some coincidence.
So I emailed him and he remembered my family very well.
And I went to meet up with him and I said, I really want to get more involved in kind of The vaccine safety awareness movement over here, but I'm not sure how to do that.
And he gave me some names and contact details of people who are very active.
And he also suggested it might be an idea to start my own resource from the experience that I'd had.
Aimed at students, because a lot of the vaccine education is also aimed at parents, and there's very little aimed at students.
So that was my first public resource.
I started a website called STRIVE, which is an acronym standing for the Student and Teacher Research Initiative for Vaccine Education, and I started that in 2015.
It's still online, and that really helped to connect me with a lot of like-minded people.
So that would have put you on the MI5 hit list?
Yes.
The first thing, yeah.
I mean, I'm sure they've marked you down.
How old are you?
I'm 41.
I thought you were, you see, that's the thing.
Again, when you get to my reverend age, you just imagine that everyone who looks younger than you is way, way younger.
And you're only I don't think I'm that much younger than you.
Maybe 10 or 12 years?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, exactly.
But you're still a child.
You're still a child, Mary.
Yeah, so you're on the list.
Have you ever wondered what it is about you, us, that makes us, why we've twigged when hardly anyone else has?
I have wondered extensively, and I've written a few articles about this.
I think it's multifactorial, but basically it comes down to At some point, losing faith in authority, an authority figure you had a huge amount of trust in.
And when you've lost that faith in one authority, then you start questioning them all.
So I think that's what happened to me when I, you know, you obviously have faith in universities and doctor surgeries.
And then when they let you down, you start thinking, hang on, who else?
Who else is lying to me?
Yeah, yeah, I think that's right.
And I think that is, of course, the great block for people like, for normies like Tobes, that if you, so long as you continue to have faith and authority and you trust them and you think, well, they're not going to lie to us, so there must be another explanation, you'll never, ever, ever,
going to wake up to the significance of building seven or the fact that the moon lander was put together with with sticky tape and you know built in the blue peter studio and filmed by or or whatever you just can't they they i i get this on my my telegram channel sometimes people say to me Why didn't you mention this, you know, my favourite thing that justifies why this conspiracy theory is real?
And you think, no, it's not like that.
Normies are under a spell.
Yes, absolutely.
My favourite, I think, piece of yours that I've read, although they're all pretty good, actually.
I don't think you do a duffer, really.
My favorite one that I keep quoting is the one where you have a go at people on our side of the argument who say, well, I don't think you should be talking about this crazy stuff like moon landings because there are far more serious things that you should be talking about.
And also it gives us a bad name.
Just run your thoughts on that by me again.
Well, I just think it's a kind of gatekeeping, and I don't think they're doing that on purpose.
But it is really a replica of the mentality that says, you know, Just trust the experts, just get your vaccine, just wear your mask, you know, they know what they're talking about and you don't.
Because this piece sprung from an essay I did questioning viral theory.
And I know it's very contentious and, you know, genuine people are on both sides.
Some people think, you know, Viruses are very contagious and the source of illness, and some people don't think that.
Each argument is credible and legitimate, and we should be able to explore both sides.
When I said, in my view, viruses exist, but I don't think that they're the cause of serious illness, I got a lot of quite extreme pushback, not from normies, who almost never comment on my posts, but from people on our side, who basically said, you know, you're very good when you comment on Social issues, but you need to stay in your lane, you know, you're not an epidemiologist, you're not an immunologist, you know, you shouldn't be commenting this, you should leave this to the experts.
And I was just, oh my god, I can't believe I'm hearing this from people on our side.
What I tried to say to them is like, look, if you're so sure you've got the truth on your side, just make your case.
There should never be anything off the table.
Nothing is too crazy to be debated.
You know, as I say, there are no stupid questions.
There are only stupid answers.
What is achieved from trying to shut people down and belittle them and ridicule them?
It's just Gatekeeping and it actually takes us further away from the truth.
And I was also trying to impress on people that, you know, we, conspiracy theorists or whatever you'd like to call us, we're not the Borg.
We don't have a high mind.
We can have different opinions on things.
And, you know, if I think X, that doesn't reflect on anyone else but me.
So I don't consider myself to be a representative of the conspiratorial community i only consider myself to be a representative of myself and you can agree with me on some things and disagree with me on other things and that's fine but this idea that we're giving each other a bad name by disagreeing on things i think really needs to be challenged yeah totally um
so the people who are giving you a hard time were people who still believe in actually a bit of a teller people who still believe in in viral transmission theory yes absolutely because it's interesting i find that the the terrain theory people can be equally equally stroppy and difficult yeah It's like, what, you still believe in viruses?
You're just like such an idiot.
How can you?
It's a real, it's one of those, that and flat earth are the two great dividing ones at the moment, I think.
Yes, I agree.
Have you looked into flat earth?
I have, and it's one of those things which I think, just like you said about viruses, both sides are so entrenched and so aggressive that I just think that's just not something I want to stray into.
I think I've made enough arguments with people as it is, but it's one of the examples I used in my piece saying, Whatever the truth is, everyone should be able to present their case freely.
And that allows the truth to emerge.
And I know there's a lot of people that say, well, you know, Flat Earth is a CIA psyop to make us all look crazy.
Perhaps, but the way we get to the truth is not by suppressing the discussion.
It's by allowing the discussion to thrive.
Yeah.
Yeah, I'm totally with you.
I was asking you in a Genuinely open spirit of inquiry because I haven't looked into it yet.
I was very impressed by somebody sent up an interview with Andy Kaufman.
I think it was.
I must get him on the podcast.
He sounds like a really interesting character and he was asked what he thought about And he came up with this really clever, eloquent answer, which was enough to cast doubt on the on the globe model at least.
And I think the thing I always say to people is, if you know, This is where I'm coming from.
I believe that the world was created by this extraordinary deity beyond time and space, and he made us all in his image, and he made the world, and he made the lilies and everything else.
And that at the moment, We're experiencing this gigantic supernatural battle between the forces of evil and the forces of good, and it's all been foretold in the Bible.
How can any conspiracy theory, however outlandish, be ruled out of question when you believe that?
I don't know where you are on the supernatural state of things, but it seems to me that one can't really understand what's going on in the world right now unless one understands the supernatural dimension.
No, I think you're absolutely right.
And I think there's a line in the Tao which says, you know, life isn't a mystery to be solved.
It's a journey to be lived or something.
And, you know, I think the reality of what we're experiencing, we can't quite comprehend.
And there are forces beyond our comprehension behind all this.
And I certainly would agree with you that there's a divine intelligence behind everything.
How could there not be?
The idea of, you know, the Big Bang is just preposterous.
That's a conspiracy theory.
Yes, well that's certainly a tell, isn't it?
A bit like the fact that we all know.
We all know about the milkmaids and the miracle of vaccination.
So we all know, and it's embedded in pretty much every scientific article.
You read the newspaper and once you become aware of it, you realize just how ubiquitous it is.
This idea that Darwin is one of the greatest thinkers ever and that evolutionary theory is just one of the building blocks for our knowledge about and understanding of everything.
And then if you give evolutionary theory even the most cursory inspection, you realize that the holes are so gaping, you think, well, hang on, how was I taken in?
Have you presumably looked into that one?
Yes.
Yeah, no, absolutely.
It's just, it's ridiculous.
It's a children's fairy tale.
But I think that's why, you know, governments are so obsessed with getting children into schools as young as possible.
Because if we were presented with these theories as fully formed, autonomous thinking adults, we'd be like, this is ridiculous, but it's fed into us from when we're four.
So we could just accept it, like we accept Hansel and Gretel and whatever.
Although, here's a bizarre thing.
I go I go riding twice a week and my favourite ride, so in the school holidays, when the girls who age between about, they're mostly girls because only girls really go to pony club, they age between about 11 and about 15.
And one thing that strikes me about girls who go riding is that they are much more socially developed than your average children in that they don't kind of go all coy when you talk to them.
They're capable because it actually it's a very adult skill being able to control a horse or in their case a pony which are actually ponies are much much more difficult than horses because ponies are their mood changes from day to day and moment to moment they're a pain in the arse and you've got to And also you could die very easily on a horse or a pony.
They can kick you and just kill you in an instant.
So they're quite sort of, they grow up quite quickly and they're communicative.
And so I love the chats I have with them.
And what I find is, talking to them, that they are much more open to ideas at that age than many adults are.
Because they haven't yet, their minds haven't been They've been moulded by the system and sort of ossified, if you like.
Their brains are still plastic and they can... I don't know what I'm saying here other than that the children are very receptive.
You know, when you tell them that, as I love doing, dinosaurs didn't exist.
They don't go, how can you say that?
That's outrageous.
They go, oh really?
They want to know more.
Have you looked into the dinosaur one, by the way?
Yes.
Yeah, I'm with you there.
But it's quite hard to find information on that.
I haven't found a really good person, a go-to guy, who can tell me exactly, give me chapter and verse on why dinosaurs don't exist.
No, no one springs to mind.
I'll give it some thought.
If I can think of anyone, I'll let you know.
What's your favourite conspiracy theory?
That's a good question.
Well, one of the earlier ones that I came across, which was another big gateway, was Paul is Dead, Paul McCartney.
Yes, tell me about this because I get a lot of stick for promulgating that one.
Oh, okay.
So I remember when I was in my early teens, and I take that fun, I'm afraid, one of my friends had older brothers who were into pop music and they tried to get us off take that and into the Beatles.
And I remember when we saw pictures of Paul McCartney in the early days of the Beatles, we're like, that that can't be the same guy as now it, you know, it's not just aging, that just can't be the same guy.
And I remember saying this was long before I became a conspiracy theorist.
And then when I found out about the Paul is dead theory later on, immediately this resonated with my other experiences.
That was my instinctive reaction as a young teenager, that's not the same guy.
And so when I looked into it and found out how much evidence there is for this, I thought, wow, you know, that really corroborates this.
There's so many things that one could reference, but I think my favourite was the Italian forensic scientists who said they were sick of hearing all the conspiracy theories that Paul was dead.
And they were going to analyse verified photos of him from before 1966 and after and prove that he wasn't dead.
And they were absolutely astonished and horrified.
To find the opposite, they said we've done these analyses and the conspiracy theorists are right, it's not the same guy.
And they published this in like an Italian newspaper.
It's very interesting that you could spot that this was not the same person just by looking at the photographs.
I wonder whether this could be a female thing.
For example, last night I was watching the latest series of Black Mirror.
Don't bother, but I have to.
I saw it already.
Oh, you saw it, did you?
The one about We, uh, what is it?
Joan, Joan is evil.
Yes, Joan is awful.
Yes, Joan is awful.
Joan is awful.
And, uh, the wife was watching it and said, and she, she couldn't sit still because she said, I know that actress.
Who is that actress?
Who is that actress?
And I was going, well, I know just like some actress that one doesn't know.
She said, no, no, no, come on, come on.
You know who it is.
I said, I don't, I know.
And, uh, she, she eventually spotted that it was the actress from that Cheesy Canadian sitcom.
What's it called?
With the gay guy.
About the rich people who go poor.
I don't know.
I mean I've watched like three seasons of it so I should have known and I didn't recognize but the wife did.
And it's the same way that when wives go for a haircut the husbands can never tell.
I think it's partly because women are designed to spot when their man has been having an affair.
And so they can pick up all these tiny clues that men would never spot.
And those skills are deployed on facial recognition and stuff.
So it doesn't surprise me that you could spot this thing where I couldn't.
But you're right, he does look different.
I mean, even after the plastic surgery, which allegedly he's had done to make him look more like So what do you think's going on there?
What's your theory on what happened with Paul?
So I did do a long article on the Beatles, which I also got a lot of stick for, probably more than any article I've ever done.
I want to read this.
OK, right.
So obviously we know there's lots of more mainstream conspiracy theories about the Beatles, but I invented my own conspiracy theory about them.
So I think that it is potentially possible that they were Orphans at Strawberry Field Children's Home who were adopted by intelligence agencies and enrolled in some kind of MKUltra programming for their later role as change agents and then placed with families to give them a credible backstory.
So I have formulated this conspiracy theory all by myself.
Is there any evidence at all to support it?
Well, when you look at the lyrics to the Strawberry Field song, I just thought, why was a children's home of such central significance to four boys, ostensibly from, you know, perhaps somewhat Celtic but nevertheless loving family homes?
I can't point to any solid evidence other than looking at clues and what they might be suggesting.
But what I think about how the establishment works is that they knew what massive change agents the Beatles were going to be, and they couldn't risk having anyone who would go off script.
So they wanted to have them under the kind of Mind control that we know MKUltra can produce and it was certainly very much active at the time that those boys were born.
So in keeping with this theory that I've developed, which may be a load of nonsense, but you never know.
I think that what happened with Paul is that his programming started to break down.
So with mk uh controlled assets uh between about 25 and 35 due to natural neurological changes in the brain programming can start to break down and a lot of mk ultra slaves are sacrificed around the age of 30 for that reason so oh the the uh the stupid club that where they all die at age 27.
right there we go yeah yeah it's 20 it's 27 isn't it i think Yes, it's 27.
So I think Paul was around that age.
So I think what happened is that his programming was starting to break down and he was being a bit too traditional and non-progressive and he wouldn't promote certain agendas like the pro-drugs agenda.
And so I think they got rid of him, they sacrificed him and brought in a replacement.
And so the theory goes it was a Canadian guy who won a Paul McCartney lookalike contest.
This is full fake Paul.
Yes.
Because one hears that the other Beatles didn't think much of the fake Paul.
No, indeed.
I think that John Lennon alluded to that in one of his later songs, didn't he?
Yes, it made some comment to that effect.
so yeah it's my belief have you seen the footage of Paul McCartney fake Paul McCartney doing, it's either Letterman or is it Jonathan Ross It's one of the others.
One or the other.
And he does this very, very weird gesture with his hand, sort of Illuminati kind of mind control thing.
No, I think I have seen that, yeah.
Where are you on take that, by the way?
Do you think all bands that achieve prominence are essentially part of some kind of MKUltra system?
I think it's very likely.
I don't, I'm not entirely sure about take that because allegedly Robbie is from Stoke, which is where I'm from, and he was just a normal lad who was, you know, picked up at age 16.
So I don't know if, you know, you can install some of that programming later on, or whether he really was selected when he was very young.
But I think, obviously, to achieve the level of prominence that they achieved, you know, they had huge establishment backing, of course, and very little musical talent.
So I'm sure that there is some degree of establishment control there.
Although I do understand that Robbie has become quite the conspiracy theorist.
Yes.
This is the problem, isn't it?
For those of us who are really deep down the rabbit hole, that we enter halls of mirrors and we're never quite sure what's really going on.
I suppose the most Troubling example of this, because you don't know what to think, is when you come across the idea, so you've been through all the elaborate theories about the Kennedy assassination.
I haven't seen any great detail, but right, go on.
But then it's posited that actually it was faked and that all these celebrity assassinations are faked because that's what they want you to think.
And then it gets very, very tricky.
And just when you thought you were making sense of the world, the rug is pulled from under you and you're... Anyway, I don't want to talk about the Kennedy thing because it's just...
This is Miles Mathis territory.
Where are you on Miles Mathis by the way?
I have had him recommended to me by a couple of people and I've never looked very deeply into his work but I do understand this is the kind of thing he concentrates on and I do need to look into him more.
Okay, count this as a very brief digression because it's just too much of another area, but Miles Mathis writes these extraordinary essays.
He's really big on bloodlines.
So whenever he'll do a number on somebody, he will trace.
He did one on J.K.
Rowling, for example, and his theory, which I think I kind of believe is that The Harry Potter books were actually written by the Cabal to promote witchcraft and Satanism and so on and she was just a kind of a patsy who was chosen.
But he looks at her background and suggests that actually contrary to the story about her being an ordinary working class girl who just wrote the books in a cafe, she's actually connected to one of the bloodlines and so on.
I think it was It was actually written for her or the bare bones of the plot were given to her on a train journey by one of the Mitfords and anyway.
But Mathis, I don't think I've ever heard him do a podcast.
I suspect that he himself might be some kind of three-letter agency composite character who puts out True, this is a kind of limited hangout with a lot of disinformation as well.
But anyway, back to the pop star thing.
The Beatles obviously were a Tavistock Institute creation.
Yes.
The Stones as well.
Yes.
And you've read Weird Scenes Inside the Canyon.
Yeah, essential reading, yeah.
Yeah, absolutely.
But it's kind of upsetting, isn't it, when you've been... when these songs have provided the soundtrack of your life and you love these songs, you know, 8 Miles High or whatever.
Yeah.
Or I love the first... I love Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young's Déjà Vu album, for example.
It's kind of dispiriting to learn that actually he was just being taken for a ride and this was just a kind of psyop designed to corrupt the culture.
Yeah, it is.
Absolutely.
And I think that's an obstacle that many people feel it's impossible to overcome.
You know, they're so attached to their memories and their favourite songs and film stars and pop stars that, you know, the emotional wrench of realising that these people were all illusions and lying to them is too much.
And I think that that does put people off, you know, asking the fundamental questions that we've been asking.
It's a horrible experience.
I'm sure it was for you to realise, you know, we've just been sold a lie.
Our lives have been based on lies.
And I think, you know, you have to have a certain strength of character to go through it.
And I certainly understand and sympathise with why a lot of people feel I just can't do that.
It's too much.
Yeah.
Yeah, exactly.
I think that they're often inclined to shoot the messenger.
Yes.
Rather than accept the message.
Yes.
Which is horrible.
Horrible.
Are you not constantly blown away?
I mean, put yourself in the shoes of the people who are pulling this trick on us.
What do you call them, by the way?
The overlords, usually.
The overlords.
I mean, you've got to admire their ingenuity.
They don't leave anything to chance, do they?
Oh, no.
I mean, they're brilliant, malevolently brilliant, but brilliant.
It's why, you know, when people say about high profile politicians, oh, they're incompetent, or, you know, they're bumbling, it's the last thing they are.
They're ruthlessly competent.
And part of their ruthless competence is putting on this illusion that, oh, we don't know what we're doing, we've just made mistakes, you know.
I think that they're intellectually brilliant, the people behind this worldwide scam.
And the royal family as well, I mean.
Yeah.
This image they have of these, you get these stories planted in the press, don't you?
Which foster this image, like the Queen being fussy about the kind of electricity bills in Buckingham Palace and about only using one bar for electric fire or whatever and turning off all the lights and The idea that the Royal Family lack for cash.
I know, I know.
So how far have you got?
What do you think is going on?
Who do you think runs the world?
Have you worked out how it works?
I think, you know, the bloodline family dynasties is very credible theory.
And I think that 13 families and if you trace world history, you find the same family names coming up again and again.
They've got kind of an unfathomable wealth and power.
And I think that they really managed to harness that power to particularly evil effects.
After Freud.
And, you know, that Harari guy said, you know, we know how to hack human beings now, we know how to program them, the age of free will is over.
And so with Freud and then Bernays, they really learned how to pull our strings and that, coupled with the rise in technology and AI, they've They've got this perfect storm of factors now to have the influence they probably wanted to have for hundreds of years but have never quite had the tools and the know-how and I think now it's all coming together and they've really got, you know, more unfathomable and terrifying power to have this ultimate control than they've ever had.
Yeah, I mean, obviously Freud and Bernays, they They formulated it in a way that other people could use very easily.
But do you not think they've had this knowledge?
They must have had this knowledge in Roman times, you know, bread and circuses and stuff.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, you may be right.
It seems to have somehow become ultra focused and more effective, perhaps because they had then the technology, you know, to beam this kind of mind control into our living rooms, you know, with television and so on, it seems.
And the latter half of the 20th century, they were able to put a hypnotist in every living room and do things that were beyond their scope in Roman times.
But yeah, you're probably right.
They probably did have much of that knowledge then. - By the way, I mean, who do you hang out with?
It's quite difficult, isn't it, to find when you believe all this stuff?
Yes.
No, I think is the correct word.
It's quite hard to engage with the normal world anymore.
Yes, it is.
Yeah, absolutely.
I think I was really lucky, actually, because when the fake pandemic hit, I got involved in local groups who were, you know, fighting back.
And for some reason, I'm not quite sure what it is, but where I live, Huddersfield in West Yorkshire, there seems to be a large concentration of awake people.
So throughout the pandemic, I made a lot of social connections in my local area with people who see things the same way.
And it's not something I'd ever been able to do before.
When I used to live in London, I struggled there, in Stoke, and I struggled there, but for some reason, There seemed to be a lot of awake people in West Yorkshire so that was okay.
Well there's a likely target for the next HAARP earthquake.
Yes.
Hmm.
Probably giving away too much.
But yes, I think maybe also because the, you know, the lockdown restrictions and all the rest of it was so outrageous, that people who maybe would have kept their beliefs to themselves earlier, less emergency situations were prepared to come forward and say, No, this is ridiculous.
You know, I'm standing against this.
So it did.
It did actually make it easier for me to make social connections.
And you know, I've observed again and again that Lockdown was actually probably the most social period of my life, so that's good.
I sometimes get people saying, look, enough talk of who's behind this and 9-11 or whatever.
We should be talking about the next step, what we do to fight back.
But for me, this is an information war above all.
I mean, what can we do other than speak truth?
Yeah, well, I think the main thing to do is to speak truth.
And the other thing which, you know, I've been trying to push more in recent articles is to concentrate on, you know, your local area, because we're all, you know, intentionally kept isolated and involved with our devices and made to believe, you know, there's no one in my local area who thinks like me.
But if you look at the statistics, you know, about 15-20% of people have had no COVID jabs, and a much larger percent have stopped after one or two.
There are actually lots of people in our local area who are on the same page, we're just not given an easy way of connecting with them.
So what I try to push is try and get out in the real world and connect with real people who live near you, because they are there, but The establishment wants you to be captured by the screen, watching their puppet heroes, thinking that you're isolated, only the puppet heroes will save you, but actually there's real power in local community.
I think you're right about that nobody's going to come and save us.
No, definitely not.
That was one of my bleakest moments, the period where I thought that Donald Trump was going to, for a time it seemed as though he was the only politician who was going to break through this system and expose it.
And then you realise, no, he's just another actor.
Yes.
With a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
Yeah.
Yeah, I think that's the moment, that moment of realization is when you become blackpilled, when you realize that nobody is coming to save us.
And we've been programmed in every movie we've seen to imagine that no, there will always be somebody, Gandalf will always ride to the rescue of Helm's Deep.
And I don't think he will.
And then you have to sort of decide, are you going to get mired in this perpetual despair until you die?
Or are you going to?
Well, I mean, that's when I took the white pill.
I don't know.
Where are you on the white pill journey?
Are you Christian or are you what?
Ancestry.
So I was born into a Catholic family and I was brought up that way.
I'm a bit lapsed.
But yeah, I would go along with the white pill theory that, you know, this is all happening for a reason.
And I don't feel pessimistic or that, you know, all is lost.
You know, there's something going on, I think, that's beyond our understanding, but it is important to speak the truth, to expose the evil, and that this all matters and it's all going towards something.
You know, there's a saying that says, everything will be all right in the end.
If it's not all right, it's not the end.
I haven't heard that one before.
Yeah, I thought you were saying all things should be well and all manner of things should be well, which is what?
Julian Norwich.
He was a woman, I think, not a man.
Yeah, because, I mean, the thing that people have difficulty with, even when they're down the rabbit hole, Okay, so I shared for example this sub stack which is written by a woman who specializes in talking about sort of Luciferianism and demons and stuff like that.
Somebody who's probably had experience of the MKUltra thing or whatever.
I don't think that some of our awake people realise the extent to which the world is governed according to Luciferian philosophy with its attendant obsession with things like gematria, with signs and symbols and stuff.
They're very careful about the dates they choose to do stuff on.
They love playing mind games with symbolism of, I mean, red shoes and also All the fake... this is another thing people have problems with, the early Damagard stuff about false flags.
people just can't quite believe that what they dearly want to believe are terrorist atrocities are actually committed by three-letter agencies.
But this stuff is real.
There's a reason why pop stars do this and this to show they're in the club.
Have you looked into this at all?
Yeah, yeah.
I have looked into it a lot.
I mean, it's not kind of my speciality area, but I do completely understand and agree that, you know, signs and symbols rule the world, and that's very important to them.
Signs, symbols, numbers, dates, and that they absolutely take this very, very seriously.
There's another saying, Millionaires don't use astrology, billionaires do, you know, so they believe in all of that.
I know that Prince William's birth was induced, so he was born on the Sun of Solstice and yeah, all that kind of thing.
Yes, and you know the one about the reason that Diana died by Pillar 13 of that tunnel?
Yeah, and it's a major satanic sacrifice day, I believe, August 31st.
And that particular spot underneath Paris is a Merovingian sacrifice spot.
I mean, this is just crazy stuff.
But when you realize that the efforts to which these people are prepared to go to deceive us and to sort out things like when their children are born, you realize that we're dealing with A different order of... they're not like us, are they?
No, definitely not.
Maybe not even entirely.
Physically, they seem to be very obsessed with bloodlines and keeping the bloodline pure.
No, they're not like us at all.
And also, you know, it used to be the case in all cultures that rituals and ceremonies were very important to all cultures and they've kind of destroyed that in a modern western culture you know there are really no rites of passage and coming of age ceremonies anymore we're given to people that's all superstitious nonsense you know modern sophisticated people don't have that sort of things but they the overlords continue to take that kind of thing very very seriously yes
that's very true that that there's you look at the course of the last the cultural shifts of the last say 120 years and what you find is that almost every tradition that that binds communities has been undermined and often destroyed which
Whether it's Morris dancing, or fox hunting, or, I mean, look at what they're doing to Cricket at the moment.
I know cricket is bread and circuses, but the way that they're now, it's weird how it works that this inquiry has been conducted into kind of racism and various forms of injustice in English cricket.
And the committee has concluded that cricket is institutionally racist, that it discriminates very much against women because, get this, women cricketers aren't paid a fraction of what male cricketers are paid.
So now somehow they've got to be Like anyone gives a toss what women's cricketers do.
And the idea that there's this thing called the ashes and it could be the women's cricket they're talking about or the men's cricket and we shouldn't discriminate.
It's all so blatant.
But then you look at Who's responsible for this?
Who commissioned this inquiry designed to undermine and destroy cricket?
And it was the English Cricket Board which gave permission or launched this inquiry with the help of John Major, who's supposedly a cricket lover.
And you think, well, how do you explain that?
It's like everything has been infiltrated.
Yes.
Yeah, everything.
Yeah.
Which I suppose is why you're so hardcore in your judgments on people who... I mean, I'm assuming you don't think I'm compromised?
No, I don't, no.
But it is hard to tell, but you have called out quite a few people on our side who you think aren't on our side.
Tell me a bit about that.
Well, I think it was, you know, I spent a lot of time studying the media.
I did do media studies A-level, which everyone laughed at at the time, but I think it was... They're not laughing now!
No, it was actually quite hard, and it was quite good training, because I understand what the media is there to do, the mainstream media, and it's there to direct your attention to the things that you want to look at, that they want you to look at.
Because they are the things that they control.
So, you know, it's very simple formula, which I always repeat, you know, if somebody is getting a lot of mainstream media exposure, they're not on our side.
It's as simple as that.
And actually, I saw a really good illustrative example of this yesterday.
You know, Abby Roberts?
Yes, of course.
Of course, yeah.
The amazing Abbey.
She got arrested for swearing at the COVID inquiry and I did a news search for Abbey Roberts arrested and there's nothing.
It just hasn't come up in the mainstream at all.
Whereas I'm thinking if it was Lawrence Fox or Andrew Bridgen who got arrested, you know, this would have column inch after column inch.
So what, you know, the ineffable conclusion I've come to is that they only direct our attention to people that they want us to know about because they control.
People that they don't want us to know about, they crush from having any significance by ignoring them, because a hit piece is helpful if you're presenting yourself as anti-establishment, it actually underlines your anti-establishment credentials.
All mainstream media editors know there's no such thing as bad publicity, and that's especially so if you're saying, oh, I'm an anti-establishment hero, and I can prove that because look how much the establishment hates me, look how mean they are to me, just like they did with Trump, just like they did with Kennedy, Bridgen.
So that's my thesis.
Interesting.
Yeah, well, let's examine that in a bit more detail.
Kennedy, for example.
It took me a while to spot that it was a wrong one, but I think my first tell was when reading his extraordinary book, The Real Anthony Fauci, and he talks about the... I mean, it's clear reading the book that AIDS was just cooked up by Fauci.
It was a kind of dry run, and that clearly the people who supposedly died of AIDS, in fact, died of These terrible drugs that, what was the one?
AZT.
AZT, yeah, the ones that Fauci pushed, which was a cancer drug initially, and then it was taken off the market because it was killing so many people.
And that was what I think killed Freddie Mercury and Arthur Ashe and all those other people.
But there were moments where it became clear that Kennedy was pulling his punches and then of course his position on the environment and he clearly doesn't
Anyone who claims not to understand that environmentalism is nothing but a tool of the elites to destroy us and take away our freedoms, who yet purports to be a freedom fighter, is deeply suspect.
What troubles you about Kennedy?
Yeah, absolutely.
I mean, that was the first thing.
So my initial analysis of him is that he, I think it's quite likely that he might be elected president and he'll rise to victory on, you know, champion of the people, exposing the COVID vaccines wave.
And then when he has people's trust over the vaccines, then he'll do the bait-and-switch.
So first of all, I think that he'll push personalised jabs.
He's always said, he said again and again and again, I'm not anti-vaccine, I just want safe vaccines.
So I think he will push vaccines, just different formula.
But then I think that the thing that the overlords really want to push now, obviously, as we know with the 15-minute cities, is the Green Agenda.
And he's always been very hardcore about that.
So I think that's why they could want to install him.
So he'll push that.
So he was actually pro-lockdown initially because lockdown, according to him, you know, reduced carbon emissions and it was good for the environment.
So, yeah, I definitely think that's where he's coming from.
I think there's a lot about him that should rouse people's suspicions.
I've just been introduced to Alison McDowell.
I don't know if you've come across her.
Yeah.
Yeah, she's got some very good things to say about him.
How, you know, he's ratified the whole idea of viral theory and that there was a pandemic because he, his book has a chapter called, you know, mismanaging a pandemic.
So he's saying, oh, there was, you know, there was a pandemic.
It was very serious.
We just handled it wrong.
And he was even supporting giving pharmaceutical treatments to healthy people, to so-called asymptomatic carriers.
You know, if we treat the asymptomatic, then we'll stop the next wave.
So I just think he's another classic limited hangout, controlled opposition.
And he's publicly come out in support of Andrew Bridgen.
And no, I don't believe that Andrew Bridgen is legitimate.
I've written him an open letter.
It's been read and shared by thousands of people.
I know that he's read it.
He hasn't responded.
I can't understand why someone like Robert Kennedy, who's very, very knowledgeable about politics, would support an enterprise like Reclaim.
You know, who are really a non-functional political party.
And I understand if people don't know much about politics, they kind of don't understand the issues with Reclaim that I've tried to highlight.
But I know that Bobby Kennedy will certainly understand that.
So I'm thinking, why is he publicly in support of Reclaim rather than any of the other grassroots, you know, anti-lockdown, pro-freedom parties?
It just seems questionable.
Yes, you just reminded me.
Loza, as you know, I'm friendly with Loza and I'm friendly with Bridgen.
He was very upset about your piece, but he was pointing out, I promised that I'd mention this to you, about the fact that people can't join his party.
And he said that the reason is that they've been denied the chance to have their bank account and I want to give them a bank account.
Hasn't that changed recently?
I believe they have, haven't they?
I believe he did tweet that quite recently that they've they've got a bank account now.
Okay.
But you know, I'd love him or Bridgen, you know, or whoever else is behind that party, Hosking, just reply to my questions, because, you know, I'm not here to smear people, I want to get to the truth.
And so I've looked at this reclaim situation and seen there are a lot of anomalies.
And I've reached out and said, please, can you answer these questions?
I'd like to be able to trust you.
I'd like to be able to support you.
But I can't in the absence of You know, this information that I'm asking you for.
Well, look, I think as a general way of a sort of witch finder, an instant witch finder general technique, it's probably quite a good rule of thumb, isn't it?
If we know their name, they're in the game, as the phrase has it.
So where would you put, what's his name?
Long hair, ex-druggie, shags lots of girls, comedian.
Oh, Russell Brand.
Russell Brand, yeah.
Oh God.
Yes, I put him in the very much controlled camp.
Yes, absolutely.
And what do you think the purpose would be of having somebody like Russell Brand in the controlled?
What function is he serving?
The predator class or the Because I think that, you know, they, they do understand human psychology very well, they understand whenever they present the latest psyop, there's going to be a certain amount of people who won't fall for it between about 10 and 20%.
So they think, right, well, we need to manage those people.
you know, as Lenin said, the best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.
So that they create a release valve for these people who've seen through the mainstream site up and say, OK, so they employ limited hangout and they get someone who's going to reveal a bit of truth.
And I also think because, you know, we're so sick of being lied to, you know, lethally lied to by the likes of Matt Hancock and so on, that when someone comes out saying even just some of the right stuff, we're so relieved and we're so grateful, we're prepared to, you know, suspend all questioning and critical thinking, just like, no, they're on our side, we have to just get behind them, it doesn't suspend all questioning and critical thinking, just like, no, they're on our side, we have And I understand that, those emotions and why people feel like that.
So I think that that's why people like Brand are put there, almost like a Pied Piper to Lead dissidents and critical thinkers down what is ultimately a dead end, because people like that will only ever go so far.
Yeah.
And Jordan Peterson?
Yeah, unfortunately, also in the same boat.
I did really like Jordan Peterson when he first came out, and I thought that interview he did with Kathy Newman on Channel 4 was TV gold.
It was fantastic.
But, you know, as time has gone on, I've realised, of course, he's controlled as well.
Again, he's in that same little club, you know, he's friends with Lozza and Bridget and he promotes them.
Does he?
Yes.
Twitter.
That's interesting.
I didn't know that.
I don't think he's, he's never, he's never retweeted me, which, which, well, not least because I'm always being rude about it in these days.
I mean, looking back, because I, I fully agree with you.
I think Vox Dei put the last nail in the coffin with, You're not going to tell me that Vox Dei is one of them, are you?
I don't know anything about them.
I know the name, but I've never looked into it.
So, well, Vox did a very, very good deconstruction of Jordan Peterson, and once you've read it, you're left in no doubt that he is designed to corral potential young men who consider themselves to be on the right.
He channels them into a holding pen.
and sort of defangs them to mix metaphors.
They focus on tidying their room and they're so busy tidying their room they forget the fact that they've got to revolt against this evil elite which is crushing them.
But that Cathy Newman interview Looking back, doesn't it strike you as odd that she put herself in that position?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know.
And in retrospect, you know, it's obviously all staged.
You know, when Lawrence Fox first came on the scene, I was a big fan of his.
When he, that question time thing, of course, in retrospect, I realised that was all staged.
But at the time, I thought it was all real.
And I must say, I'm not a huge fan of his music, but I did buy his CD and even went to see him in concert because I wanted to support this guy speaking out.
I thought, yeah, it's fantastic.
And at the same time, that was kind of going on with Katherine Newman and Jordan Peterson, I had the same feelings about them.
But, you know, I've realised much more subsequently about how the media works, and of course it's staged, of course it's set up, of course it's all limited hangout.
And while we're in the business of trashing my dear friends, tell me about Toby.
What's going on there?
What the hell is going on there?
I think, I don't know if it's gone ahead, I know they were having some issues.
This event he was doing with Isabel Oakeshott, where Lawrence Fox was going to play Matt Hancock, I mean, that just seemed to be kind of trolling us.
And when I saw that Lawrence Fox was playing Matt Hancock, I was like, oh, yes.
Yeah, but to his credit, Lawrence did all that.
He did drop out, yeah.
Which I thought was to his credit and a kind of, I mean, I suppose that There are very few people that I don't have occasional doubts about.
I think Dick is probably safe.
That your brother?
Yeah.
I think I trust Dick and I think Abbey would be another one.
Bob, absolutely.
Bob the cartoonist stand-up and there's a few others.
I want to think well of people and I'm very much in the business of giving people the benefit of the doubt until they prove themselves to have betrayed me.
What was that that went on with you and Toby recently?
I saw you tweeting something.
Well, we do have these tiffs which we play out every week.
It is a form of theatre.
And I don't mean that there's anything insincere about it.
I don't think, oh, what act can I play today?
We just turn on our computers and completely wing it.
I very rarely prepare.
But as I understand it, or as I see the show, Every week we play out this division that exists between those in the normie paradigm and those of us who are down the rabbit hole and the frustration that those of us down the rabbit hole have in trying to explain our theories to normies.
People, when I throw it open to comments, they say things like, how can Toby not know about Operation Paperclip?
How can he not know about the Titanic and the Olympic and stuff?
And my excuse for him, and I think it is not implausible, is that, because I remember what it was like when I was a normie.
I hadn't heard of Operation Paperclip, or if I had heard of it, I would have kind of dismissed it as kind of one of those, Outlandish things that we hadn't got time to focus on because there was more important news to deal with.
And I wonder whether that's that's part of the problem with people in the normie paradigm that they are so distracted by the news as they're meant to be.
They don't have time to investigate the stuff that needs investigating.
Yeah, yeah, I think that's absolutely true.
And it's very difficult to get your head around the fact that a lot of what's in the news is just absolutely fabricated nonsense.
You know, it's a fairy tale.
Because, first of all, the ego kicks in.
And says, no, no, no, you know, if this was a lie, I would know, you know, the famous Mark Twain quote, that it's easier to fool people than to convince them they've been fooled, because their ego will protect them.
But also, you know, you have to do a lot of thinking, a lot of research, because the first question, obviously, is, why would they make that up?
What's the point?
And explaining why they make things up, why they lie about things, is not an easy question to answer.
So I think that it's much easier to default to, these conspiracy theorists are obviously delusional, they've smoked too much weed, they're insane.
Of course the news tells us the truth, why wouldn't it?
If it was lying to us, they'd get in trouble.
It's very difficult to unpick that for people.
Yes.
I can't remember if I've mentioned this before on one of my podcasts, but my wife was taught, her English teacher went on to become the head of MI5.
And one of the classes that she took, she gave the girls, Um, was how to read a newspaper and how to deconstruct it.
Right.
And she taught them not to believe anything they read in the newspapers.
Oh, brilliant.
Which was kind of interesting, wasn't it?
It didn't particularly work, but, but, um, I, it's interesting that that's what, that's what she did.
The, the media one realizes, well, you've, you know, this from your media studies.
Um, uh, and I know it.
With Bitter Regret having been part of this industry.
The media is responsible for so much of the spell we're under.
Absolutely.
Oh, completely.
Yeah.
The media and schools.
And well, don't forget the entertainment industry.
Yes, of course.
Yeah.
But it's everywhere.
You actually heroically work your way through the newspapers still in order to deconstruct them?
Yes, so every morning I read the Daily Mail, The Guardian, My Local Paper, Henry Macau, who's one of my favourite conspiracists, and Natural News.
I don't know him!
I've told you.
We'll come back to him.
Sorry, carry on.
Um, so what I do is I look at the left wing, right wing mainstream, then I look at the local news, which is usually much more accurate, reliable than the mainstream media.
And then I look at the conspiracy view.
And then I can kind of see, you know, what they're pushing, what they want For us to focus on what the subtext might be.
And, you know, once you learn how to read the media, it's actually very helpful.
So I know a lot of people say, oh, you know, I hate, I hate the news.
I never read it.
I never watch it.
And I can certainly understand that perspective.
But it is actually really helpful if you like, as David McGowan says in his books, he says the mainstream media always tells you everything that's really going on, but you just need to learn how to read it properly.
Because his books are completely based on mainstream sources, 100%.
He said they tell you everything, which would be between the lines.
Oh, OK.
So you're saying I should read the... If you can bear it!
I understand why a lot of people can't, but he said that and I think he's absolutely right.
It tells you everything you need to know, if you don't take it at face value.
There's always clues and, and he's right.
So he never references any conspiracy sources in his books, all mainstream sources.
And he draws conclusions.
Because I think what the mainstream counts on is people have very short memories these days, and they just are looking at what's going on now this week.
They're not connecting it to something that was in the press a month ago, a year ago, five years ago.
If you learn how to do that, then you can really see the themes are being weaved and the story arcs they're creating.
I see.
Can you give me any particular examples of this?
Madeline McCann.
Oh yeah, tell me about that.
So, you know, sadly hundreds of thousands of people, including children, go missing every year.
And if you ask anyone, name one missing child.
Madeline McCann.
Maybe Ben Needham as well, but basically it's just Madeline McCann.
And why on earth has this story stayed in the headlines for 15 years?
Now, if you trace it back, then you can see that it's actually pushing a number of agendas.
So I maintain, and I may be proven completely wrong and be made to look stupid, but I do think that they are going to find a person who are they going to present to us as being Madeleine McCann.
And they recently had that German girl or Polish girl who was saying that she was Madeleine McCann.
And I've always maintained, well, that's too obvious.
They had her on the world stage because within five minutes of making these allegations, which could easily have been proven false with a very quick DNA test.
They didn't do that.
They strung it out for ages and they even put her on Dr. Phil, which is, you know, one of the biggest talk shows in the world.
And I think the reason for that was to implant in people's heads the idea that she could still be alive because, you know, everyone says, oh, it's so obvious she's dead.
The parents did it.
And I've always maintained, well, that's too obvious.
That's what you're supposed to think.
And we're being set up for when she or the actress is going to play her is eventually found.
It will be used to restrict free speech, which I think they're going to use the Nicola Bully thing for as well, saying, you know, all you crazy conspiracy theorists, you've victimised these innocent parents, this bereaving family when she was alive all along.
So, you know, we need restrictions on what can be said online because, you know, this is so traumatic for them.
The other big agenda, which I always think that the whole Madeleine McCann thing has been about from the beginning, is about microchipping children.
So, you know, they're making it a legal requirement as of next year to microchip your cat.
And I'm sure that's not because they care about our cats, but I think it's about priming us to get used to the idea of microchipping children.
So I think that they always play the long game.
And one thing that they've got very good at is getting us in kind of goldfish situations where we're only planning in terms of the next couple of weeks, next couple of months, whereas they think in decades and centuries.
So they've been playing this long game with Madeleine McCann for coming up 20 years, and it's pushing a number of these agendas, which if you look back at all the stories through the years, you can kind of see them coming to prominence.
Tell me about Nicola Bully, because I'd never really understood that either.
What's going on there?
Well, again, as with the Madeleine McCann thing, it's like, you know, people, especially adults, do go missing quite a lot.
Maybe they get one paragraph in, you know, page 37 of their local paper, but Nicola Bully was plastered across headline news and all the nationals and international news.
It's like, why?
What's so special about her?
And again, there's been a lot of focus on all these ghouls, as people online now call it, they were commenting on the Nicola bully thing.
You know, how dare you blame her partner?
You know, how dare you think there was a third party involved?
This is so traumatic for the family.
Haven't they been through enough, etc, etc.
It's the same rhetoric as you see put against people who blame Madeleine McCann's parents.
So I think, again, it's about restricting free speech on the guise of, you know, protecting people's feelings.
But like I said about the Nicola Boy thing, if they didn't want us to speculate on it, why on earth make it headline news across the country?
If you don't want people to speculate on something, you just keep it out of the press, which is pretty straightforward to do.
They didn't do that, so I think they were baiting us into a trap to comment on it, make up so-called wild theories, you know, if the partner did it or whoever, so they can use that as evidence for why we need a restricted speech online.
Yes, I've noticed that I scarcely dare ask, are you familiar with the theories on Sandy Hook?
Yes.
For example.
Yes.
That doesn't add up, does it?
No.
No, no.
But, okay, so an example like that, or Nicola Bully, or those Those students in Nottingham who were murdered recently by an immigrant, which again was given quite a lot of play, wasn't it?
Yes.
And what I quite often notice, even within my Telegram group, is that someone will go, no hang on, I do actually know somebody who knows these people.
Now what's that about?
Is it a sign that my group is infiltrated by intelligence?
Or is it...
They're very good at creating these cover stories.
Well, it's very hard to say, because I get that as well.
You know, on my Madeleine McCann theories, I've had someone, and no one I know personally, who I've had any kind of significant interaction with, but someone saying, oh no, you know, I know the parents, you know, it definitely happened, like the media said it did, but they may be telling the truth, but equally, anyone can come online and say that, can't they?
So, unless I know somebody personally, I think I'd take testimonies like that with a large pinch of salt.
There's an essay that I want to write.
I wish you'd write it for me.
See whether you can recognize this phenomenon I'm describing.
So, okay, I'll give you a not very good example of it.
So I was talking the other day out riding to my trapped audience, because you can't get off a horse, they're stuck next to me whether they like it or not, about The submarine shenanigans, the Titan and stuff.
And I said, there's so much about the story that doesn't add up.
I said, like, what about this billionaire, this British billionaire that nobody's ever heard of before?
And somehow he lives out in UAE or something, and he runs this aircraft business or something that nobody's ever heard of.
And there's this stock photograph of him in this kind of sports kit and so on.
The normie person's take on that is, well, just because he's wearing sports kit doesn't mean he's not a billionaire.
I can tell you, I've met billionaires and they all dress...
And I notice that people on our side often do it.
They will always make excuses to gold plate, or at least explain on behalf of the... to do the cabal's work for them.
Yes.
You see it on Twitter all the time.
We seem to be keen to debunk our own debunking.
Yes, apparently this is a psychological phenomenon.
I can't remember who told me about it, but when you're promoting disinformation, it's best to leave holes, because the people who are buying disinformation will then fill in the holes themselves, and that makes the theory more credible to them, because they've formulated some of it themselves, and then they're more wedded to it, and they'll push it more.
Well, that's a sort of reverse example of that, isn't it?
If I understand you correctly.
So for instance, so you're saying like, someone is not dressed like a billionaire.
Yeah.
And then someone who wants to defend that person.
Yeah.
Even though back in their mind, they're like, yeah, they're not, but they then come up with justification themselves for why they're invested in the theory, because they've come up with some of it.
Yeah.
I do find it frustrating that even In the company of all the wonderful people you meet down the rabbit hole, there are so many people who are still prepared to make excuses for the other side by, for example, playing that game we talked about earlier, where you say, this is a conspiracy theory too far.
We shouldn't be talking about Flat Earth.
It's ridiculous.
Or picking holes in the...
Saying, well, actually, you know, under certain circumstances, jet fuel can damage steel beams, or... And they think they're being reasonable and applying due scepticism, but actually... Yeah, I think, I think...
Nobody wants to believe that they have lived a lie.
So I think we put these parameters on ourselves, like, okay, the pharmaceutical industry are very greedy, can understand that they cut corners, release dangerous products, you know, you can kind of accept that and therefore vaccines are dangerous without disrupting the rest of your worldview.
But if you go deeper and say, no, it's not, it's not cutting corners, it's not incompetence, or whatever.
The vaccines are actually designed to do nothing but harm, because there's a psychopathic cabal ruling the world who want to kill a lot of us off because they're practicing satanists.
And that just blows people's minds.
It's too much.
So I think people are prepared to go a certain A certain distance down the rabbit hole before they start to feel threatened.
And I think their ego, and not meaning to say that they're arrogant, but their ego in terms of their identity starts to get threatened the more things that they confront, that they've believed in and based their lives on, which perhaps are not true.
And a lot of people just hit that barrier and go, right, I can't go any further.
I can't do it.
Yeah.
Yeah.
What I've found, and I don't know whether this is something you've experienced, is that Once you've been... I get grief from Toby on this.
He says, like, you believe all the conspiracy theories.
Not just 9-11 and the moon landings, but also fake Paul McCartney and stuff.
But what I've found is that once you've investigated a few conspiracy theories, What you find is that the enemy's modus operandi is the same.
They have these tells, and once you see the tell in an operation, you can almost see at a glance whether something else fits the pattern.
Yes, yes, absolutely.
I think Naomi Wolf explained this really well.
She did this short presentation, it's only about 10 minutes long, and she was basically saying, If something's very high profile, big budget, as it were, getting a lot of media attention around the country, around the world, you need to ask yourself, is this real?
Because the more high profile, the more high octane, the more likely it is to be fake.
And she explained there's an amendment in the NDAA in America that is actually completely legal for the media to fake events, present them as real to propagandize the public.
And she says, we're in an age now, it's not crazy to assess media stories as real or not real.
It's actually crazy not to.
And I think that's what, you know, obviously, most people don't know that.
It just sounds crazy.
Why on earth would the media do that?
Surely that's illegal.
It's not illegal.
And there are lots of reasons why they do it.
But it's kind of creating this parallel false reality.
And this is what I try to impress on people.
I say, you know, reality, Is, you know, your friends and family, where you live, going out in the world.
What's happening on screens?
You have no way of knowing whether that's real or not, and that becomes more and more the case with the AI and the deep fakes.
So you've got to examine everything with a sceptical eye.
You know, including this interview, the technology certainly exists for the cabal to whip up deep fakes of you and I, clone our voices.
So everything you're seeing on a screen, ask yourself, is this real or not real?
Obviously some of it is real, but you've got to keep asking that question.
Yes, I was just looking behind me, because people sometimes analyse what's in the background, and I'm wondering whether there's any kind of... what's that mysterious illuminati device hanging up by the window?
Yes, they've done this to me as well, so if you see that behind my head, you just see the whole thing, someone said, oh is that the Ouroboros, which is some sultanic symbol?
The Ouroboros, yeah.
It's the snake devouring its tail.
It is!
Yeah, but this is not, you see, it's a Zen symbol, it's a broken circle.
That sounds pretty dodgy though, that sounds quite New Age, Mary.
Oh right, it's not mine actually, it's my husband's and we did think about removing it but then there's just a big blank wall so we thought, well... We haven't done a background check on your husband.
By the way, is he down the rabbit hole with you, by the way?
Oh yeah, yeah, totally, that's how we met.
Oh fantastic, that's a result.
Naomi Wolf.
She gets a lot of publicity, so where are you?
She does, that's true, that's true.
So I haven't looked into her very deeply, I just, I did see this one clip that she did and I often link it in articles because I just think she explained really well, you know, false flags and why we need to look into this.
But yeah, she has had a lot of publicity, I think she was very involved, was it with the Clinton campaign?
I think she Yeah, well there's that.
Okay, so you've got people's past.
I suppose it's possible for people to renounce their past.
Like, look at my past.
You could use that to write me off completely.
So I think we have to have room to be able to accept that they have changed.
At the same time, I do think that there is... I can't remember what it is in... There are some areas that Naomi doesn't want to go.
I always find that suspicious.
Right.
Such as?
Well, would she go for Kazarian Mafia?
Would she go for Viruses Aren't Real?
I don't think she would.
No, no, I don't think so.
I think she would.
No, no, I didn't say.
Would she get, she won't do, she won't do any of the kind of spiritual war stuff.
And I'm kind of thinking you look at the, look at the real people on our side.
Mike Yeadon, for example.
There's no, there's nowhere Mike won't go.
You could put an idea to him and he wouldn't instantly write it off just because it's a sort of forbidden territory, he'd think about it and then take a view.
So maybe that's another tell, I don't know.
I mean, I think that sometimes genuine people are just too emotionally invested to have an Egypt say no, no, we can't talk about this.
It makes us look insane.
But other than that, yeah, it's a good yardstick.
You know, if you're invested, if you're really invested in the truth, nothing should be off the table, you should be prepared to discuss anything and go where the evidence takes you.
So if there's ever anything that someone goes, nope, that's a step too far, then yeah, that's a red flag.
Yeah, exactly.
And if your business model is sticking to areas which are not going to jeopardize your place with a foot in the mainstream, then that for me is not a deal breaker.
But it makes me question, and it's why I've noticed, have you been to any, well, you must have been, to the kind of festivals, like the Hope, I went to the Hope Freedom Festival last year, which was really, really good.
And there's another one this year as well.
I'm hoping to go to Hope and this one.
And the kind of people that you, One converses with, they tend to be, it's obvious whether or not they are on side or not.
Yeah.
Partly it's just, it's a kind of almost, they've got an aura about them, a sort of You know, glowing red eyes, the sort of truth or whatever it is.
But partly it's just their kind of openness to everything and they don't really care whether people think they're crazy.
There's no guardedness about them.
Yes, absolutely.
I think you're absolutely right.
I do hope you're wrong about Losser and Bridgen and the few others because I'm very fond of them.
But yeah, it's hard.
It's hard.
I mean, please ask them to respond to my letter because, you know, I want allies, of course, I don't want more enemies.
But, you know, the biggest thing really is this ridiculous lawsuit to sue Matt Hancock for defamation.
And Abbey Roberts actually encapsulated it really well in an essay I think she did yesterday on The Dead Poor.
She said, suing Matt Hancock for defamation is like pulling Ted Bundy over for speeding.
You know, it's just it's so it's so trivial compared to what I believe that he's actually guilty of.
And if Andrew Bridgen was legitimate, you know, this lawsuit would on its own put huge question marks over his legitimacy.
And it's a ridiculously large amount of money for a defamation lawsuit as well, which, He does not have a good chance of winning or certainly won't win.
So that on its own, I would want to say to him, look, if you're legitimate, why are you doing this?
You must understand that this just puts question mark after question mark over your head.
I mean, what?
It's not necessary.
Yes, yes.
So I'm suddenly struck that I so loved your explanation of the Madeleine McCann thing.
And it's obviously your forte.
I'm wondering whether there are any other things in that vein that you can explain for me.
Because you've done Bully, you've done Madeleine McCann.
What other sort of thought control things are there?
While you're thinking about it, I've just done this substack, which I think you're going to like.
It started with a thing that had annoyed me for a long time.
Fake quotes on the internet.
And it started off because A few years ago, I had used several times the famous Orwell quote in times of universal deceit, truth telling becomes a revolutionary act.
Except of course, he never said it.
It's just made up.
It's just made up shit.
But it sounds so good.
And you want it to be by George Orwell because it's so expressive of all the things that one believes in and what one has been trained to think that Orwell is one of us, he's a hero and stuff.
And I used this as a launch pad and I was saying that back in the day I would have written this piece and it would have ended up, you know, just concluding that this is the consequence of living in an accelerated culture and where everything's dumbing down and the internet leads to the proliferation of fakery.
But actually, now I know what I know about the world, it seems to be actually more sinister than that.
You think about the power of quotations.
They're a kind of substitute for For depth, apart from everything else.
We like soundbites.
We love soundbites because it's TLDR, isn't it?
It just saves us having trouble.
And in the same way, in the second part of the essay, I'm going to go back to Shakespeare, for example.
What do we do with Shakespeare?
Well, we fillet him for the best quotes.
We fillet him for standout quotes or standout moments, like Hamlet's soliloquy.
And then you think, OK, so what message are these soundbites putting out, these catchphrases?
And we love catchphrases.
And I just realized, That here is yet another way they deceive us.
What sells really well at Christmas, or used to anyway, is big bumper books of quotations.
They appear in quizzes and stuff.
So these phrases are imprinted in our minds.
And then you examine the phrases, and what kind of message are they putting across?
And actually what you find, what they're often doing, is putting across the message of, what do you call them, the evil predator class?
What's your name for them?
The Overlords.
The Overlords.
The Overlords take such care over everything that they even go to the trouble of inventing these quotes or imprinting these, misattributing these quotes or whatever.
Yes.
Anyway, that's given you time now to think about other interesting... besides Madeleine McCann.
Oh yeah, so what do you think is going to happen to That Jim Cavaziel movie about child trafficking and adrenochrome, do you think he's going to get bumped off?
No, I think probably not.
I haven't looked into that a great deal, but I think what they're going to try and do with it is try and pass it off as the rantings of a crazy conspiracy theorist, you know, like they do with Mel Gibson.
This is what they do an awful lot of the time, is that they take these serious concerns that people have, equate them with non-serious people who are seen as, you know, crazy fringe like Mal Gibson is now depicted as this, you know, anti-Semitic, drunk, white beating fool.
So what he says is automatically discounted.
So I think that's their kind of MO, that they will reveal a certain amount of truth, but they'll do it in such a way that the normies would never take it seriously.
I've sometimes thought that I should do this this podcast in a kind of a jester's hat with with bells on it and a funny stick things as a kind of to stop them taking me seriously as a threat and bumping me off.
It might work, but I think that what you're saying is possibly true, that if you bump something off, even if you make it look like an accident, I think it sort of lends credence to the person who's the conspiracy theorist, doesn't it?
Oh, totally.
Yes, absolutely.
Well, I was just going to say, I think the strongest weapon that they have against us is to ignore us.
And that's what that's what they do.
They ignore us, or they paint us as crazy fools.
And, you know, I've noticed this, the kind of people they will report on in the mainstream as holding conspiratorial beliefs.
Always people who have these credentials that you can dismiss them.
Like, oh, everyone knows he's crazy, he's evangelical, religious, drunk, all the rest of it.
So when you've got someone who's kind of professional and credible and reasonable like yourself, they will never give that person prominence because they're too credible and that they could actually sway a normies mind.
So they have to equate these kind of beliefs with crazy fringe lunatics. - By this token, do you think that David Icke is one of them, not one of us? - I don't know about David because like many people, I have to credit him with a lot of my awakening You know, I've read quite a lot of his books.
He gives some fantastic information.
But of course, every normie knows about the lizard thing and that they can use that, of course, to discount everything else he's ever said.
And he's addressed this in one of his books.
He said, look, I know that people say to me all the time, your information is great, but you discredit it all by talking about the lizard thing.
Can't you just not talk about the lizard thing?
And he said, I've thought about that.
But the thing is, he says, you know, it's just, it's true.
And it's really important.
So I just have to tell people and if they think I'm crazy, then so be it.
And, you know, he could well be totally legitimate about that.
But the overlords have realised that that's useful for them.
Go, oh my God, look at this crazy lunatic that screams lizard.
And then conflate everything else he believes with thinking the Queen's a lizard.
This happens all the time, you know, if you're talking about vaccine safety concerns to a normie, you go, oh, I suppose you think the Queen's a lizard as well.
It's like these topics are not related in any way, but they have been conflated as being related, unfortunately, because of David Icke.
By the way, the reason that I'm flashing is partly obviously because I want to induce epileptic effects in my viewers, but mainly it's because my thing's running out of battery.
It goes back to your celebrated essay that I referred to.
I have no problems with the lizard theory because I think it's true as well.
I do.
I do think that it goes back to The Garden of Eden, really, and it's the seed of the serpent.
I mean, I think some of it is kind of metaphorical, isn't it?
We don't know exactly what happened back then.
But it seems to me that reading the Old Testament, as I do, there's a reason why God is very keen on erasing certain… the Edomites, for example.
I think it is that the seed of the serpent, the people within the… who've got this sort of Lizard thing within them seem also to be into things like consuming human flesh and, well, child sacrifice and stuff.
And God doesn't like that.
So, and I know people who've seen these shapeshifting lizard things.
So...
Well, you know, I don't discount anything.
And you're absolutely right that this, you know, dragon lizard serpent symbolism is ancient.
And, you know, it's obviously very significant.
And so I'm, I'm open to everything.
But I understand why David promoting that theory is useful to the overlords, to discount the other things he says.
Because, you know, obviously, one awakens in stages, and it is easier to believe that the pharmaceutical industry might make a dangerous product than it is to believe that the Queen's a lizard.
But by getting people to have confused the two too early on, I think it stimmies people from going further than they might otherwise.
Yes.
Well, we recognize that, but we're not in the business of... I think ultimately, our job is to tell the truth, regardless of where it takes us.
And then be honest if we're proved wrong or whatever, then to adjust our position accordingly, but not to hold back from saying stuff just because somebody might think it sounds a bit wacky.
Oh, I agree.
And I think that this is exactly what David, precisely what David has said in his books.
But I think even when someone's being completely honest and legitimate, the overlords can sometimes Use that to their advantage.
And I've noticed often when they report on so-called crazy conspiracy theorists, they don't provide any evidence that what they're saying isn't true.
They just say kind of he or she believes this.
Oh, my God, that's crazy.
And it's just they just repeat what somebody believes as if it's so self-evidently insane.
That means that person's insane.
But they very rarely actually produce the evidence that, OK, well, this might sound out there, but it could be true because, as they say, the truth is stranger than fiction.
But they don't do that.
It's almost as if there's a set number of beliefs which just don't need any evidence to disprove because they're so obviously not true that you don't need to prove they're not true.
And that kind of keeps people trapped and not thinking.
Just go, oh, yeah, crazy.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Right.
I think I need a cup of tea now.
It's been really lovely talking to you, Mary.
You too.
So, tell people where they can find your essays.
Okay, so my website is miriaf.co.uk and I'm also on Substack, which is miri.substack.com.
Is that your living, by the way?
Yes, it has become so.
It wasn't initially, but it's picked up enough that, yes, just about.
Well, that's good.
Yeah, yeah.
I'm really happy.
I mean, one thing one can be grateful to technology for, it seems to have... I mean, they don't let us earn very much, do they?
They don't let us get any bigger than a certain size.
I think that's part of their containment strategy.
Yes, definitely.
Yeah, yeah.
Shadowbanning is horrendous.
My audience is actually smaller now than it was when I started out because, you know, I've got like about 15,000 followers on Facebook, but I get about four likes because people just don't see my post.
But yeah, we persevere.
Which is why, like, when you know how much Naomi Wolf makes from her sub stack.
I know.
You know?
I know, I know.
I mean, I don't want to sound sort of... I'm not jealous or envious or whatever.
I just... it's a tell.
It is, it is, yeah.
Anyway, sorry epileptics, if you're now rolling on the floor as a result of my flashy thing.
I hope you've enjoyed listening to this podcast and please keep supporting me on Substack and Subscribestar.
Locals is probably the best place for that because it's easiest to work.
Patreon or you can buy me a coffee or buy me lots of coffees.
That's the thing to do.
Oh and come to my live shows.
I'm doing some live shows.
I'm doing one with Clive DeKalb I think at the end of June in Dorset so there's it's not that big a venue so so I'd get you get you get in there soon because my events do sell out which really annoys Toby of course which is another reason to sell them out and then I'll be doing one with Mike Yeadon I've got one with Mike Yeadon coming up and I've got one with Bob Coming up as well.
I think possibly on the bank holiday weekend, the last weekend in August, possibly in the north or in Wales.
I'm not sure which.
Anyway, I'll keep you posted.
And Miri, thank you again.
It's been an absolute joy.
And thank you.
Thank you again for being one of the few people who got thin disguised autobiography when it came out.
